ABSTRACT
We have seen that there are two main lines of objection to the theory that personal identity can be defined in terms of psychological continuity. The first was the Reduplication Argument. The second is the vicious circularity objection: the objection that any account of personal identity in terms of memory will necessarily be viciously circular, since memory presupposes personal identity and, therefore, cannot be used to define it. Since any account of personal identity in psychological terms must be at least in part in terms of memory, if this is a good objection to the straightforward Memory Criterion of personal identity it will be equally forceful as an objection to the more general psychological continuity account.
